[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

View post   
File: 44 KB, 562x855, IQ.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4307182 No.4307182 [Reply] [Original]

What are the best books about IQ, fiction or non-fiction?
Any fiction with high Intelligence protagonists?

We know that intelligence is largely inherited genetically (50-80%), but the environment also plays a small role.

>> No.4307192

source on the pic: http://motls.blogspot.ca/2006/03/iq-in-different-fields.html

if you are curious. I'm interested in books and literature related discussions about Intelligence

>> No.4307216

>mfw education majors have the lowest IQ

>> No.4307227

Why are you spamming this on here and on /sci/?

>> No.4307235

Ender's game has a high IQ genius character.

>> No.4307272

>>4307227

huh? there is no other thread with this wording.

>> No.4307281

>>4307182
If it's 50-80% genetics that means it's 20-50% environment and that doesn't sound small to me. Minor, yes, but not small.

>> No.4307342

>>4307281

there are interesting ramifications of the heritability of intelligence, since different groups of people evolved differently

>> No.4307346

Why is medicine so low? Isn't it really hard to get into med school in the first place?

>> No.4307347

The guy who invented the IQ test said that measuring intelligence is the worst possible thing the tests could ever be used for. It was designed to pick out which grade-school age children were probably developmentally impaired.

>> No.4307350

>>4307272
You are the same exact guy who just posted this same IQ thread on /sci/.

>> No.4307355

>>4307347

Einstein had many wrong ideas/interpretations about his theories as well. We corrected them and moved on.

>> No.4307357

>>4307350

A picture is not a thread.

>> No.4307359

Report thinly veiled shitposting on /lit/.

>> No.4307384

>>4307355
We havent actually 'corrected' anything for IQ. Theres as little evidence for it measuring 'cognition' now as there was when heriditarians brought over the concept from France.

Just another hilarious attempt where people try to quantify something they know nothing about.

>> No.4307407

>>4307384

Science disagrees with your current ideology.

>> No.4307411

>>4307407
In what way?

>> No.4307421

Reported for troll..

>> No.4307458

>>4307346
Not really. You basically just have to be good at studying and memorization.

>> No.4307460

>>4307346
No. The more prestigious medical schools are very selective but other schools will take pretty much anyone who can afford to attend.

>> No.4307472
File: 431 KB, 562x549, Man Mode.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4307472

>>4307411
>>4307384
>IQ. Theres as little evidence for it measuring 'cognition'

There are literally thousands of studies that empirically support the utility and accuracy of these tests.

>> No.4307499

>>4307472
Um, ok cite the one that shows how 'empirical' IQ testing is.

By empirical please note i dont want an argument, i dont want a theory i want you to give me scientific evidence.

>> No.4307519

>>4307499

original experiment/theory :

>Refinement and test of the theory of fluid and crystallized general intelligences. Horn, John L.; Cattell, Raymond B.

http://psycnet.apa.org/index.cfm?fa=search.displayRecord&uid=1966-13188-001


Meta-study supporting the validity of these theories as they are put to use:
http://ir.uiowa.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2639&context=etd

Further meta-study further supporting the theory
http://www.nature.com/mp/journal/v8/n1/full/4001249a.html

While these tests might not satisfy you personally or religiously or politically, they are used are providing useful and meaningful scientific results. Maybe in the future they will be refined.

But saying the science is not there or empirical, is just a factual error.

>but u cna't no nuffin'

can be said about every branch of science if you are really anal and blind.

>> No.4307531

>>4307384
>heriditarians

this is way funnier than creationists calling biologists 'Darwinians'.

>> No.4307549

I am a reptile.

>> No.4307553

>>4307519
This has nothing to do with religion political or ideological doctrine.

I did not ask you to provide citations to a group of theses, i asked for empirically tested evidence for the validity of IQ.

>they are used are providing useful and meaningful scientific results.

The reality is the science isnt there psychologists all make lofty assumptions about mental processes and make theories without any supporting evidence, science is science. There are no soft sciences and there are no social sciences there is science.

What you give me does not satisfy me because they are not what i asked for, they are not so because you do not have the evidence, and until you do you are a person with an opinion.

>> No.4307562

High quality bait.

>> No.4307571

>>4307553
The first link is empirical validity for the criteria they use for measuring intelligence.

The other links simply show the success the tests have in terms of explanatory and predictive power.

>> No.4307584

>>4307562
Brain responsible for intelligence
Genes code brain development
Genes hereditary

Where else do u get capacity to process info, craricity, reasoning? Your soul lol??

Of course genes are the foundation...u can't teach a dog or retard calculus!

>> No.4307589

>>4307571
Never asked you to provide me with criterion based validity.

A prediction in science is rigorous not 'happens some of the time'.

>> No.4307606

>>4307589
False again. The first study is empirically justifying their test, their measures of intelligence.

The other links are meta studies of the test providing explanatory and predictive power. All results are statistically significant and rigorous.

>> No.4307622
File: 96 KB, 600x402, 1384732128043.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4307622

>>4307584

next you'll say speech, hearing, memory and skin color have a genetic basis!! oy vey

don't you know everything is equal and a social construct? The reason Chihuahuas are not as fast as Grey Hounds is because of training and economic differences!!!!

>> No.4307956

Psychology student here.

Basic non-fiction

Francis Galton
Hereditary Genius

Charles Spearman
The Abilities of the man. Their nature and measurement.

Other Spearman works were he goes on about the g factor... it's probably the most consistent theory out there.

Then you got Sternberg,Howard Gardner and if you want to go full goy, Daniel Goleman... or check a scientist like Mayer on emotional intelligence.